Updat Dent. Coll .

j 2013; 3(2):28-33

Original Article

A Comparative Study on Accuracy and Reproducibility of Alginate and

Addition Reaction Silicone as an Impression Materials.
*Shakila Fatemaa, Sheikh Md. Shahriar Quaderb, Mohammad Shamsuzzamanc,Mirza Md. Arifur Rahmand, Nasima Khane
a
Assistant Professor & Head, Dept. of Science of Dental Materials, Holy Family Red Crescent Medical College Hospital
b
Assistant Professor & Head of the Unit, Sher-e-Bangla Medical College, Dental Unit, Barisal
c
Oral & Dental Surgeon, Z & Z Orthodontic & Dental Clinic, Uttara, Dhaka
d
Registrar, Dental Unit, Holy Family Red Crescent Medical College Hospital
e
Assistant Professor & Head, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Saphena Women’s Dental College, Dhaka

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Article history: Background: To achieve accuracy and exact reproduction of

prosthesis, choosing a perfect impression material is essential.
Received : 21 October 2012
Accepted : 17 March 2013 Especially to make the prosthesis as accurately as possible,
impression material should possess some essential properties, like;
minimum dimensional changes, good flow ability and easy
removal. Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the
Keywords:
accuracy and surface detail reproduction of Alginate and Addition
Impression Material, Alginate, Reaction Silicone as an impression materials. Method: This is an
Addition Reaction Silicone, experimental in vitro study. In this study Impression by Alginate
Accuracy, and Addition Reaction Silicone were made using a round stainless
Reproducibility steel test block with three horizontal lines and two vertical lines.
The horizontal lines were used for evaluating the surface detail
reproduction, and vertical lines were provided for the dimensional
accuracy. For dimensional accuracy the length of the middle
horizontal line in between vertical lines and the distance between
the top and bottom horizontal line was measured using travelling
microscope. And for surface detail reproduction three horizontal
line of one segment were observed under stereomicroscope. Result:
According to study results Addition Reaction Silicone is better than
Alginate regarding quality of impression. Conclusion: In
comparison to Alginate, Addition Reaction Silicone might have
better performance about accuracy and surface detail reproduction.

Introduction: The material is very soft elastic, & resistance to

Impression material is used to record the tear while removes from the undercut 1.
intraoral structure. Ideally the material should be Clinically, there are many kinds of impression
extremely accurate, and virtually distortion free. materials available for dental use. Generally,
The accuracy allows to record minute details they can be divided into two large groups: (1)
without taking additional impression. Synthetic elastomeric impression materials that
include Polysulfide, Condensation Silicone,
Addition Silicone and Polyether. Silicone
*Address of Correspondence:
impression materials are the most acceptable in
Dr. Shakila Fatema this group. (2) Hydrocolloid impression
BDS, MS (Prosthodontics), Assistant Professor & Head materials, this group includes Agar Agar and
Dept. of Science of Dental Materials, Dental Unit Alginate impression materials, the latter being
Holy Family Red Crescent Medical College Hospital 28
Cell phone no: 01712835382
E-mail: shimla.rahman@gmail.com
 Accuracy and reproducibility of alginate & silicon
more popular. Clinicians are not agreed which of
these two groups is better but, because Alginate
is cheaper than other materials, it is hoped that it
may become the material of choice.
Accurate impression of is important for the
success of removable metallic fixed and
implants prosthesis. The properties of
impression materials are responsible for
reproducing the surface accurately and
dimensionally stable as well.
An accurate refractory cast may be obtained
when an impression of the original cast is made
in a material with elastic property & poured with
investment.
The most important characteristics of impression
material include high accuracy, exact
reproduction of details, controllable dimensional
changes, good flow ability and easy removal and
handling.
Several types of impression materials are
available in dentistry. Every material has some
strength and limitation. Alginate is one of the
most frequently used dental impression
materials. It is an elastic irreversible
hydrocolloid and is used for study casts, master
casts and working models for the fabrication of
intraoral appliances 2, 3.
It is also used for creating the opposing model
for crown & bridge, It is hygienic, inexpensive,
does not lose surface detail in wet mouth ,simple
cost effective, form an inseparable part of
indirect restorations 4. But it has many
shortcomings as an ideal impression material 5.
This material does not readily flow into areas in
which the tray does not extend. If distortion
occurs, it cannot be corrected.
Alginate is supplied both as powder and paste
form. The most popular form of Alginate is
supplied as a powder, which is mixed with
water. Many Alginates are supplied with a
reaction indicator that changes color of the
impression when the material is set; and
presently, dustless Alginates are preferred.
Powder may be available in bulk form in
containers or in individual sealed pouches. Paste
form is available in two viscosities, tray and
syringe viscosities. The paste-type material has a
29
Fatema S et all
shorter gelation time than the powder-type
material. The best surface quality can be
obtained with the paste-type material 4.
The Elastomeric impression material was
developed as an alternative to natural rubber
during World War II. These materials have since
been modified chemically and physically for use
in dentistry. Initially, this group consisted
exclusively of Polysulfide impression materials.
Subsequently, Condensation-cured Silicones
were developed.
Today the most popular Elastomers used in
dental practice are the Polyethers and Addition-
Reaction Silicones, or Vinyl Polysiloxanes 6.
Elastomeric impression materials are often used
to reproduce soft tissues, the dental arch, and
teeth which have been prepared for indirect
laboratory restorations. There are many
commercially available products which fulfill
criteria such as nontoxicity, ease of handling,
appropriate accuracy, good detail reproduction
and dimensional stability 1.
Addition Silicones (Polyvinyl Siloxanes) have a
moderately low-molecular weight Silicone that
contains silane groups. Since Addition Silicones
do not produce a volatile by-product during
polymerization, very small dimensional changes
occur on setting. Hydroxide groups in many
products produce hydrogen gas, resulting in
small bubbles on the model surface if pouring is
not delayed by 30-60 minutes. Many of these
Addition Silicones contain catalysts like
palladium that absorb this hydrogen. Newer
Addition Silicones have been formulated to be
more hydrophilic 7.
The advantages of Addition Silicones are that
multiple casts can be made from a single mold
and it is possible to wait for an extended period
of time before pouring the mold with the
investment materials. They are considerably
more expensive to use but are preferred by some
laboratories for making multiple casts from
same mold.
Compared the accuracy of Alginate and
Elastomeric impression materials 8. They found
that Alginate impression materials had a degree
of accuracy comparable with other elastomeric
impression materials.
 Update Dental College Journal
This study is aimed to compare the impression
materials in terms of accuracy and detail
reproduction between Alginate and Addition
Reaction Silicone.
Materials and methods:
It was a prospective comparative in vitro study.
This study was carried out in the Department of
Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry,
Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University.
Total duration of the study was from July 2008
to June 2010. Impression of a standard stainless
steel die was used as a sample of the study. Sixty
impressions of the standard stainless steel die
were made by Addition Reaction Silicone and
Alginate impression material.
Group-A: Thirty impressions were made from
stainless steel die using Addition Reaction
Silicone impression material.
Group - B: Thirty impressions were made from
stainless steel die using Alginate impression
material.
STUDY PROCEDURE:
Laboratory Procedure:
Preparation of the round stainless steel test
block: In order to measure Dimensional
Accuracy and Surface Detail Reproduction a
round stainless steel die was constructed. The
die had three parts namely, round stainless steel
test block, stainless steel ring and a perforated
stainless steel tray .The surface of test block had
three horizontal lines in between the vertical
lines. The length of the horizontal line in
between the vertical line is 20mm and width is
0.4mm and the distance between the top and
bottom horizontal line is 4mm. Each horizontal
line divided into two halves by pointed punch at
the middle of the line. Horizontal and vertical
grooves were made on the specimen as reference
marks (ab & cd).The stainless steel ring was
used to fit around the borders as a mould for the
impression material. The perforated stainless
steel tray was used to hold the impression
material.
Preparation of Alginate impression -material
specimen:
Required amount of Alginate powder and water
were taken according to the manufacturer’s
recommendations at room temperature. The
measured powder was shifted into premeasured
30
Vol 3 Issue 2, October-2013
water that has already been poured into a clean
rubber bowl. The plastic spatula which was
sufficiently flexible to adapt well to the wall of
the mixing bowl was used to mix the powder
and water. After maintaining the mixing time,
impression material was placed on the ruled
surface of the test block after placing the round
metal ring .Then the metal tray was placed over
it for impression making. The impression was
removed after setting and the measurement was
taken.
Preparation of Addition Reaction Silicone
impression material specimen:
Very high viscosity Addition Reaction Silicone
duplicating material (putty consistency) was
taken. Base and catalyst was taken according the
manufactures recommendation and kneaded
with clean finger instead of wearing latex gloves
to prevent sulfur contamination from these
gloves which inhabits the setting of the silicone
impression materials and may produce major
distortion. After maintaining the mixing time
impression material was placed on the ruled
surface of the test block after placing the round
metal ring .Then the metal tray was placed over
it for impression making. The impression was
removed after setting and the measurement was
taken.
Study procedure:
In this study, impression was made from a
standard stainless steel die for measuring
dimensional accuracy and surface detail
reproduction. The impression materials were
prepared according to manufacturer’s instruction
at room temperature. Mixing time was
maintained carefully .Then it was placed in the
marked surface of round test block after placing
the round metal ring .The metal tray was placed
over the impression .A gradual, constantly
increasing pressure was applied to the tray in
order to remove excess material till it seats
perfectly on the ring. Then 0.5 kg weight was
placed over the tray and the impression were
separated from the test block after their setting.
Then the impression was checked for inclusion
criteria in the study. All the sample of
impression was tested for horizontal and vertical
distance by travelling microscope and
measurement of surface details by using
stereomicroscope (10x).
 Accuracy and reproducibility of alginate & silicon Fatema S et all

Testing effects on dimensional accuracy Group A = 30 impressions of Addition Reaction

Dimensional accuracy was measured by measuring Silicone
length of the middle horizontal line guarded by the Group B = 30 impressions of Alginate
vertical line (20 mm) and the distance between the ab= Length of the horizontal line in between the
top and bottom horizontal line (4 mm). Every vertical line
measurement was taken three times and their of stainless steel die.
average values were placed on the data sheet. Table I shows that length of the horizontal line
Measurements were taken by using a traveling in between the vertical line (ab=20 mm) of
microscope (sensitivity 0.01 mm) was used. Group A mean±SD is 19.91±0.11 mm and
Group B mean±SD is 19.72±0.18 mm. Analysis
Testing effect on surface detail reproduction
revealed that Addition Reaction Silicone
The impressions were separated from the test
impression material (Group A) is dimensionally
block after setting, and their surfaces was
more accurate than Alginate impression material
assessed by using a stereomicroscope for
(Group B) which is statistically significant
reproduction of the lines from the test block
between two groups (P<0.05).
surface at a magnification of 10X.Then their
photographed was recorded. Table II: Distribution of impression of standard
The samples were graded as follows 9. stainless steel die (cd=4 mm) according to
Grade.1: Good detail, continuous line. dimensional accuracy.
Grade.2: Poor detail, some discontinuity of the Group Mean±SD P value
line. Group A 3.81±0.17
Group B 3.73±0.13 0.044
Grade.3: Marginally or not discernable.
Data were collected on the basis of Dimensional Group A = 30 impressions of Addition Reaction
Stability and Surface Detail Reproduction Silicone
according to pre designed data collection sheet Group B = 30 impressions of Alginate
(Appendix-I) and collected data was recorded on cd= Distance between top and bottom horizontal
the pre designed data collection sheet. After line of stainless steel die
coding and editing data were analyzed by SPSS Table II shows that cd distance of Group A
(Statistical Package for Social Science for mean±SD is 3.81±0.17 mm and Group B
windows version-12). Chi Square and T-test mean±SD is 3.73±0.13 mm. Analysis revealed
were done to find out significance value. that distance between top and bottom horizontal
Results: line (cd=4 mm) is dimensionally more accurate
All samples were evaluated under two in Addition Reaction Silicone impression
parameters and those evaluations described in material (Group A) than Alginate impression
tables. In terms of dimensional accuracy, material (Group B) which is statistically
analysis revealed that Addition Reaction significant between two groups (P<0.05).
Silicone impression material is dimensionally Table III: Comparison of surface details of
more accurate than Alginate impression material impression between two groups.
which is statistically significant. Furthermore;
according to surface detail reproduction Group A Group B P
Addition Reaction Silicone produce better (n=30) (n=30) value
surface details than Alginate impression material No % No %
which is also statistically significant. Good 28 93.33 20 66.67
Poor 2 6.67 10 33.33 0.010
Table I: Distribution of impression of standard Marginally 0 00 0 00
stainless steel die (ab=20 mm) according to Group A = 30 impressions of Addition Reaction
dimensional accuracy. Silicone
Group Mean±SD P value Group B = 30 impressions of Alginate
Group A 19.91±0.11
Group B 19.72±0.18 0.001 Table III shows that surface detail of Impression
between two groups where group A shows
31
 Update Dental College Journal
93.33% good surface detail where as group B
shows 66.67% good surface details. Again in
group B 33.33% impression shows poor detail
while in group A 6.67% poor detail detected.
The difference was statistically significant
between two groups (P<0.05).
DISCUSSION:
As accuracy and exact reproduction of details is
very important for making accurate prosthesis,
in this regard choosing a more effective
impression material is vital. To select the best
impression material several researchers
conducted different studies in this area, the
present study was also concerned about the same
issue.
Current study evaluated the accuracy and
reproducibility of impression material to
compare the dimensional stability and surface
detail change of Alginate and Addition Reaction
Silicone impression material.
All impression materials were taken from
stainless steel test block for dimensional change
and surface detail reproduction. The impression
materials, specifically very high viscosity
Addition Reaction Silicones (Putty consistency)
and Hydrocolloids impression materials,
specifically irreversible hydrocolloid (Alginate),
were used as impression material in this study.
In terms of dimensional accuracy according to
the present study findings addition Reaction
Silicone impression material showed better
performance than the Alginate.
Because the diameter of horizontal length in
between vertical line and top and bottom
horizontal line of stainless steel die is more
accurate in Addition Reaction Silicone than
Alginate. Similar study conducted by 10
supported the present study results
Where they also considered Addition Reaction
Silicone as a better impression material in
comparison to Alginate.
Another study 11 found that Addition Reaction
Silicone had greatest accuracy as well as good
resistant to permanent deformation and
considered the most dimensionally stable
impression material when compare to Alginate
which concur with the result of the present
32
Vol 3 Issue 2, October-2013
study.
Regarding Surface Detail Reproduction Group-
A representing 93.33% good surface details and
6.67% poor details where as Group-B
representing 66.67% good surface details
33.33% poor details. The study showed that
Addition Reaction Silicone can produce better
surface details than Alginate.
Similarly, 12 also found in one of his studies,
conducted in 2010, where the Addition Reaction
Silicone also showed the best performance in
terms of overall surface quality and accuracy.
CONCLUSION:
At the end of the study it could be concluded
that the Addition Reaction Silicone is a better
option for the taking accurate impression, as
because it has good surface reproduction
capacity and dimensional accuracy.
The study has some limitations: (I) Dimensional
stability of Alginate changed within 15 minutes.
Measuring through travelling microscope takes
more time. It is helpful for us to get rapid
measuring tools. (II) Larger sample size can be
used. (III) Time dependent dimensional stability
can be recorded.
RECOMMENDATION:
Although most of the previous studies including
the present study evaluated the Addition
Reaction Silicone as a best impression material.
In many other studies the performance of
Alginate impression material also showed very
close result to the Addition Reaction Silicone.
Therefore further study could be conducted to
overcome the existing confusion and also the
limitations of the present study to select the best
impression material.
References:
1. Kronström MH, Johnson GH, Hompeschc RW
(2010), ‘Accuracy of a new ring-opening
metathesis elastomeric dental impression
material with spray and immersion disinfection’,
J Prosthet Dent vol. 103 pp 23-30.
2. Pace SL. Polyvinyl impression materials vs.
alginate impression materials. Contemp Dental
Assisting. Feb 2006:20-23.
3. Boksman L, Tousignant G (2009), “Doctor-
technician perspectives: Alginate Substitutes:
Rationale for Their Use,” by: Dentistry Today,
vol. 28, no. 4, pp 104-105.
 Accuracy and reproducibility of alginate & silicon
4. Nandini VV, Venkatesh LV, Nair KC (2008),
‘Alginate impressions: A practical perspective’, J
Conserv Dent vol. 11, no. 1, pp 37–41.
5. Rubel BS (2007), “Impression materials: a
comparative review of impression materials most
commonly used in restorative dentistry”. Dent
Clin North Am. vol. 51:pp. 629-642.
6. Wadhwani CPK, Johnson GH, Lepe X,
Raigrodski AJ (2005), ‘Accuracy of newly
formulated fast-setting elastomeric impression
materials’, J Prosthet Dent vol. 93, pp 530-9.
7. Farah JW, Powers M (2003), “Elastomeric
Impression Materials”. The dental advisor is
taken from the December issue, Vol. 20, No. 10.
8. Peutzfeldt A, Asmussen E (1989), ‘Accuracy of
alginate and elastomeric impression materials’,
Scandinavian Journal of Dental Research vol.
97, pp 375-9.
9. Ahmed S, Tredwin CJ, Nesbit M, Moles DR,
(2007), ‘Effect of Immersion Disinfection with
33
Fatema S et all
Perform-ID on Alginate Alternative, An
Addition Cured Silicone And Resultant Type iii
Gypsum Casts’. Brit Dent J, vol. 202, no.1, pp.1-
7.
10. Johnson G H, Chellis KD, Gordon GE, Lepe X
(1998), ‘Dimensional stability and detail
reproduction of irreversible hydrocolloid and
elastomeric impressions disinfected by
immersion’, J Prosthet Dent vol. 79, pp 446-53.
11. Chen SY, Liangb WM, Chenc FN (2004),
‘Factors affecting the accuracy of elastometric
impression materials’, Journal of Dentistry vol.
32, pp 603–609.
12. Singh H (2010), ‘The Comparative Evaluation
Of The Dimensional Accuracy Of An Alginate
And Improved Alginate With That Of The
Elastomer Impression Material —an In Vitro
Study’, Indian Journal of Dental Sciences Vol. 2,
Issue 1 pp 21-23.